In truth, I was prompted to start this conversation by the reaction of some readers to the previous one. the publication ofin which I touched on the "perestroika topic." On the one hand, in the souls of many caring people, the events of those years are still given deep pain. On the other ... It seems that the "liberal-democratic" brainwashers have worked very successfully in this direction, creating a whole complex of myths, which, alas, some of our fellow citizens firmly believe in. Well, that means we have a subject for discussion. As usual, I’ll make a reservation: I’m not going to impose my own opinion on anyone.
Just try to make some well-known statements regarding the "perestroika", its causes, events and personalities, which I personally consider completely wrong. Yes, in addition, it’s also dangerous - if only because the fact that following it may well lead to a repetition of that hard times. You are interested? Then let's go ...
1. "Perestroika" began Gorbachev and a narrow group of his followers in the upper echelons of power. All the blame for what happened lies with them
Let's start, as usual, with the simplest. Those who try to attribute the whole range of actions that led to the collapse of the Soviet Union, a radical change in the geopolitical picture of the world, as well as the great hardships and victims of the Soviet people, to the Secretary General of the Central Committee of the CPSU Mikhail Gorbachev alone, either do not understand the essence of what happened or deliberately mislead. With approximately the same success, one can blame the Second World War and all the destruction and misfortune brought to it into this world alone by Adolf Hitler. Each crime has not only direct perpetrators and accomplices, but also inspirers, as well as those who created the conditions and premises for its commission. This applies to perestroika to the fullest extent. In fact, it was not Gorbachev who started it in 1985, but Nikita Khrushchev, who organized a coup in 1953. There is absolutely reliable data, not just talking, but screaming that he already began the systematic activity of dismantling the USSR in the 60s. The first stage in it, of course, was the Twentieth Congress of the CPSU with its “debunking of the personality cult”, which led to the complete destruction of the Soviet people’s faith in both the Communist Party and the ideology declared by it. It was a major, fatal blow. The rest of the steps were rather technicalbut more than eloquent.
The destruction of the Union Ministry of Internal Affairs, which, according to Khrushchev’s plans, was to be followed by the elimination of the centralized KGB apparatus, the systematic weakening of the country's defense power, in fact, the collapse of the army, and exclusively harmful actions in the field of agriculture, which ultimately led to food problems in the USSR. .. Khrushchev was simply not allowed to finish what he had begun, but what he did was more than enough. After a long era of reign of Brezhnev, with the light hand of domestic liberals sealed with the stigma of "stagnation", Yuri Andropov took up the matter with renewed vigor. Today, some, not understanding his affairs and true motives, are trying to sculpt from this General Secretary almost the image of “the last communist in the Kremlin”, a possible savior of the USSR. This does not correspond to the truth at all. Few people today realize that Andropov’s actions during his extremely short (less than one and a half years) term of office resembled most of all Khrushchev’s voluntaristic and ostentatious “campaigns”. And in no way thought-out and systematic programs carried out by Stalin, with which some "wise men" undertake to compare him with some fright. He laid down a "time bomb" under the USSR not only by nominating Gorbachev for the highest party posts (although, as the former head of the KGB, he should have laid his bones, but not to allow this elevation), but his entire cadre policies, new pogroms in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the KGB, and much more. In particular, the project "economic Reforms ”The USSR was started precisely by Andropov. And its development and implementation were entrusted ... to Gorbachev and Ryzhkov! The result is logical.
2. There was no alternative to either "perestroika" or Gorbachev. Everything that happened was inevitable
This is generally a wholly false. And it is refuted not only by the existence to this day on the world map of the People’s Republic of China and its successful experience in literally all spheres - economic, political, military ... All the talk that the Soviet Union "broke into the arms race imposed on it by the West", “Turned into bankrupt because of collapsed oil prices from the United States” and the like, in reality, they’re not worth a penny. This is all, sorry, attempts to put the cart before the horse, so let’s leave them to the liberal public, whose "knowledge" in the economy is limited to a set of quotes from Chubais and Gaidar. In fact, in the 20s, 30s, 40s, the USSR not only survived in a much more difficult economic situation, but also “somehow” managed to win wars against it continuously, help the Allies and develop at an unprecedented pace . How do you explain this ?! And by the time Gorbachev came to power, there was no “decline” in the country, and even more so, “devastation”. They began just with his appearance and as a result of his own wild "experiments", which, of course, were not any experiments, but represented an integral program to ruin the country. The potential of the Soviet Union (industrial, scientific, military) was so huge that to this day it continues to be exploited not only by Russia, but also by a number of post-Soviet countries where it was smart enough not to completely destroy it. There were no objective reasons for a radical breakdown of the country. The argument that almost 99% of its population, right up to the gnashing of teeth, wanted “freedom”, “democracy” and Solzhenitsyn’s ridiculous editions of millions of copies - that’s complete rubbish. "Taste" to the people of anti-Soviet was instilled again with the filing of Gorbachev ...
Regarding himself ... There are quite reliable testimonies and memoirs of very high-ranking officials, saying that neither Andropova, nor, moreover, Gorbachev as Brezhnev's own successors in those days, when he was still in his right mind and strong memory, did not see. He wanted to transfer the post of General Secretary to Vladimir Scherbitsky, the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Ukrainian SSR! However, through many-way intrigues, at the source of which stood both Andropov and some who forever remained in the shadow of the “puppeteers”, Shcherbitsky was mercilessly “wiped” from elevation. By some strange “coincidence”, during the fateful moments of the election of the General Secretaries of Andropov and Gorbachev, he was at the maximum distance from Moscow. Both times, by the way, on business trips in the United States. It smacks of something more than a coincidence ... Then there was Chernobyl, regarding which over the years there are more and more questions. This catastrophe played a huge role both in the collapse of Shcherbitsky’s political career and in the collapse of the USSR. And soon after that the mysterious death of the Ukrainian First Secretary followed, which many tend to consider the most probable and best of the possible alternatives to Gorbachev. By the way, the supposedly documentary and even “top secret” working record of the meeting of the Politburo of March 11, 1985, at which Mikhail Sergeyevich was elected to the highest party post, “unanimously and with universal unanimity,” gives such a crude and clumsy “linden” that regularly questioned by serious researchers. Discrepancies in the details, time parameters, much more. Some, on this basis, even speak of the “conspiracy” and “coup” of Gorbachev’s supporters. Well, quite reasonable.
3. The "Western world", primarily the United States, has nothing to do with "perestroika"
Well, of course, no! If you throw in the trash the main principle of any research, and, especially, an investigation: “Look for someone to profit from!”, Then this can be fully believed. If you are guided by common sense and the available facts - then, sorry, by no means. Even if one casts doubt on the authenticity of materials on the Internet of the so-called Harvard and Houston projects, supposedly developed in the United States, and with literal accuracy to the point describing the entire course of “perestroika,” and also, importantly, its terrifying consequences, it’s arguable with reality all the same it will not work. The main beneficiary from all, literally all to a single initiative of Gorbachev, was not the USSR, not his people, but just the West. We can consider the “projects” mentioned above a conspiracy thesis, but what about the very real plans of the United States to destroy the Soviet Union ?! Another question is that over time, thanks to the growing defense power of our country, actions aimed at achieving this goal and their implementation have moved from the military to the ideological plane. Quite reliable statements by prominent Western politicians, military, intelligence officers that you can’t take the force from the outside of the USSR, and therefore you need to make every effort and means to break it from the inside, is documented more than enough - enough for a chubby book. And the work of all kinds of "enemy voices" and other projects to carry out just such a policy, which flew into Western countries at a pretty penny, is that all was done in vain?
It was worth in 1985 that Gorbachev met for the first time with US President Ronald Reagan, who openly called our country an “evil empire,” as these “sincere dates” (already with George W. Bush, no less, however, an ardent anti-Soviet and Russophobe), began to take place regularly at least once a year. Most of all, it was like a report to the overseas owner and receiving new valuable instructions from him. All the talks of the Secretary General about "general and complete disarmament", "the struggle for peace" and the like, could be attributed to the region of wonderful dreams, if the defense potential of the country were not destroyed under their accompaniment. And there is no need to talk about the complete, gratuitous and gratuitous surrender to Gorbachev of the West of all the countries of the “socialist camp”, about his role in breaking up such international structures as the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance and the Warsaw Treaty Organization that are vital for maintaining the balance of power in the world. The West, having first made every effort to bring the situation in the USSR to a boiling point, subsequently set about to finish it openly. In 1991, the International Monetary Fund, if anyone forgot, refused to the Soviet Union the promised financial assistance: you have, they say, "the political situation is unstable." Unfortunately, there is no direct documentary evidence of the direct work of Mikhail Gorbachev on Washington and London. On the other hand, where do they come from? At such levels, as you know, cooperation subscriptions are not taken or given. As for me, the best evidence here is the results of his activities and the attitude towards them in the West.
4. The "fathers of perestroika" were guided by the best of intentions. It just all went wrong
Generally speaking, the cynical phrase: “We wanted the best, it turned out as always ...” is extremely popular with politicians around the world. In domestic - so in particular. That's just exactly 99 cases out of 100 it is nothing more than an unscrupulous lie. The most remarkable thing is that Mikhail Sergeyevich in his interview to this day is trying to pull the same bagpipes: there were “mistakes and mistakes”, but “the necessary changes were made”, but the fact that everything collapsed to hell and the Union fell apart is to blame ... "putschists from the Emergency Committee!" Verbiage is refuted not only easily, but very easily. The “economic reforms” of Gorbachev and his “team” were not just wrong. They were criminal! And they represented, figuratively speaking, not even an attempt to start building a house from the roof, not tearing out a foundation pit, but a deliberate destruction of a hundred building, which, by the way, lived hundreds of millions of people, was quite solid and able to stand for another years. Every single action of the “perestroika” in the field of economics was initially aimed at only one thing - the creation of ideal conditions for plundering the USSR economy, for its ruin. It didn’t smell of any “acceleration” - only euthanasia. However, this is a topic for a completely separate discussion, and, by the way, this is just for him I have a heap of serious documentary evidence. However, the point is not even in the economy. Not in the idiotic "anti-alcohol campaign" and the like tweaks ...
If Gorbachev took up first of all for them, one could still talk about “erroneous decisions”, “thoughtlessness” and the like. Although, as such, a person with his career experience as a leader could admit ?! However, first of all, those who by no means had good intentions, but immediately paved the way to a well-known address for the entire Soviet people, did not take up the economy! We started with ideology! Or rather, with the denigrating and distorting history, depriving Soviet people of memory, pride in their country, self-esteem and self-esteem. The people, on whose heads every day heaps of new heaps of "terrible compromising materials and bloody sensations" fell out, later it was possible, excuse my expression, to suck in anything - at least the predatory "grabbing", at least the "reforms" of Chubais and Gaidar. That is how it all happened, have not forgotten? For the success of their own vile and criminal endeavors, the “perestroika” (with the strongest support of the West, of course) literally in a few years managed to nurture a whole tribe of “defenders of democracy”, which later became their demonic assault squads to destroy the whole of the Soviet Union. With a country brought to collective psychosis, to group insanity, one could already do anything. So they did ... After that, all the talk about: "we didn’t want anything like this ...", not even a penny is worth it. Just as they wanted! Beautiful words, such as “glasnost”, “democratization”, “pluralism”, turned out to be a bright wrapper in which deadly poison was enclosed. And the creators of Perestroika knew very well how it would work.
5. "Perestroika" liberated the Soviet people, gave them a lot of chances and opportunities. They simply could not be used
Yes, I’ve freed ... Someone from the post, someone from property and savings acquired by overwork, someone from life prospects, and many, many from life itself ... I, you know, talking about perestroika, invariably recall the quote from my beloved Mikhail Ouspensky: “Yes, damn her! ... what did she give you? She gave vodka, a mouthful of verbal rubbish and even unrealizable hopes! ” True, it is said about science there, but it is better, in my opinion, not to express it. They lured people with folding fairy tales, promised a heavenly well-fed and merry life, and out of the noise they cleaned them to the skin, leaving them on a bare ashes. Good if alive. By God, I am amazed at some "historians", but there are those who, believe me, are trying to put "perestroika on a par with the October Revolution of 1917! Like, the scales are the same ... Well, let, let's say, comparable, which is debatable. But here are the “signs”, “pros” and “cons”, here it is necessary to place exactly the opposite. In 1917, 90% of the country's inhabitants took away the wealth, social rights and government of those 10%, which for centuries, in fact, parasitized on their work, sat on their neck. In "perestroika" the exact opposite happened! The wealth of a vast country, built and saved by the labor and valor of millions, suddenly became the property of a handful of “chosen ones”. The empire in October was not destroyed, but only a bit “cut back”. What the “perestroika” did with the same lands, squandering and profiling them in no time, no Bolsheviks dreamed of. Yes, the 17th revolution was an explosion, and the explosion, as you know, is always destructive. It was only shortly after it that the creation began, unprecedented in our country, neither before nor, alas, after. From plow to nuclear flame and space. After Gorbachev and his gang, the process began to reverse. We barely managed to stop ...
Speaking of "opportunities provided by perestroika," her singers and adherents lie like gray geldings. What are the features? To enrich yourself, not being afraid that OBXSS employees will knock on your door? And how many people got so rich? "Rose", not ending in ruin, a gangster cellar or a hole in the forest, the fate of a homeless person or an alcoholic? The problem is that the enrichment model proposed by Perestroika was criminal and predatory through and through. With all the ensuing consequences. The real chances in this coordinate system were those who jumped into the "masters of life" from the offices of the party-economic nomenclature. Well, because they are all for their own sake, loved ones, and started! And not for the sake of millions of compatriots, who, having fooled their heads with commercials about Lenya Golubkov, were convinced that they would all become Russian Rockefellers in the beautiful new world of "wild capitalism", which had opened up in the place of a society of universal justice. At the same time, the truism about how many “equal opportunities” exist in every millionaire for hard workers and unemployed people, nobody who torn into it by Soviet people, of course, did not explain. What other possibilities were there? "Get out of the scoop"? Well, yes, that is an achievement, of course. Read the writings of dissidents, watch movies, after each of which I wanted to hang myself? To revel in the “chernukha” that poured from every screen, from every book or newspaper page? Ah, yes, it seems that it was called “publicity” ... I will not say anything about drug addiction, alcoholism, prostitution, banditry. Also, you know, opportunities. There is someone who was learning what ...
Faced with those who continue, despite everything, to talk about “perestroika” as a phenomenon that had at least some positive aspects, moments and consequences, you begin to think: maybe it’s worth spending over her “fathers” and “ foremen "something like the Nuremberg trials ?! The word is right, because it should turn out! There are still plenty of survivors, and witnesses, and indeed the accused. But an entertaining event would have happened. The process of the century, one might say. And the benefit from him would be enormous - in any case, certainly greater than from the interviews of some figures trying to convince the country and the world that their crimes were a blessing.